Friday, October 9, 2015

On September 21, 2015 - the same day Scott Walker dropped his presidential bid - Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice N. Patrick Crooks died in his chambers. Crooks had previously announced that he was going to retire at the end of his term which would have been next year.

Three people - Joseph Donald, JoAnne Kloppenburg and Rebecca Bradley announced their candidacy for the seat. The primary will be in February and the general election will be in April.

Gov. Scott Walker announced Friday he is appointing to the Wisconsin Supreme Court conservative appeals court Judge Rebecca Bradley, who is already running to fill the vacant seat.

Walker made the announcement at a news conference at the Capitol.

Walker previously appointed Bradley to the Milwaukee County Circuit Court in 2012 and the 1st District Court of Appeals earlier this year. She won re-election to the circuit court position in 2013.

He said his criteria for the selection included integrity, an understanding of the law and recognition that the role of a justice is to uphold the constitution and laws of Wisconsin.

This is Bradley's third political appointment in as many years, despite her alarming lack of judicial qualifications.

The two years that Bradley served as circuit court judge was at children's court in Milwaukee, and she didn't even oversee all the types of cases that are there, much less any other type of court proceeding. She didn't even serve for five months as the politically appointed appellate court judge before Walker gave her another bump up today.

This is a blatantly political move to give Bradley the advantage in next year's elections by giving her the incumbent status. The only reasons for her meteoric rise over the past three years is that she has all the right right wing credentials - Federalist, John Bircher, and obedient puppet - and that Walker has to still kowtow to the special interests to get money to pay off his massive debts.

Although it will need to be seen as to how much advantage there really is to be the political appointee of a governor with only a 37% favorability rating.

If Ms. Bradley (Foundation) had a luck of common sense or decrncy, she would have refused this nomination and asked to win her race on her own merits. The fact that she didn't do this speaks volumes.

Now it's time to hang the Walker/Bradley cronyism around her neck. Also wouldn't be a bad time for the John Doe cases to be formally appealed with documents released, just to remind people what kind of crookedness Ms. Bradley Foundation supports

Well, having a WHOLE NEW SET OF JUSTICES on the WSC would help a lot, whenever the end of the attached story comes to fruition:

WI GOP Begins Retroactive Decriminalization of Scott Walker Fundraising: ... [T]he Wisconsin legislature is going the extra mile with three separate bills to retroactively decriminalize the behavior at the heart of the investigation and to defang the nonpartisan elections agency that aided it. ... The first will allow candidates to directly coordinate with big money "issue ad" groups that keep their donors secret -- allowing politicians to form their own shadow campaign committee, and then ask billionaires and corporations from around the country (or even overseas) to contribute million-dollar checks, without any public disclosure. The second will destroy the nonpartisan Government Accountability Board, widely regarded as a "model" for the nation, that assisted prosecutors in the Walker investigation. The third will exempt politicians as a category from these types of corruption probes. ... In a 4-2 July decision that broke along ideological lines, the Wisconsin Supreme Court's right-wing majority ended the John Doe probe into whether Governor Scott Walker illegally coordinated with supposedly "independent" secret money groups during the recall elections. ... By ruling as it did, the Court overturned years of precedent and practice in Wisconsin. ... But the state's highest court, elected with over $10 million in support from the same dark money groups under investigation in the Walker probe, was anxious to create new rules. On Wednesday, GAB Chairman Judge Gerald Nichol, a former Republican District Attorney appointed to the board by Scott Walker, said the justices should have recused themselves. ... "Most judges in this state who I've talked to are appalled by that decision," Nichol added.The justices' failure to recuse may yet be challenged before the U.S. Supreme Court, which in 2009 held that a West Virginia Supreme Court Justice should have recused under similar circumstances....